Barack Obama says women should not be shamed for having sex while men get a pat on the back

originally posted by: GreenGunther
a reply to: Bluesma
If we wish to evolve and become more intelligent creatures we must leave behind our animilistic side and embrace the rational.
I just want the human race to evolve towards positive, intelligent creatures, I want us to be able to control our instincts.

Okay, I get that. I don't see things the same way, I have a tendency to feel that we are not being intelligent when we combat our social drives. We can see that nature has a balance, and when we fight it, we disturb that equilibrium and it eventually hurts us.

I get the drive to evolve as individuals, and a lot of people see the social and individual drives as opposing "enemies".
I tend to see them as opposing, but complimentary, forces.
The social animal within has drives which would allow our biological forms and our societies to evolve in positive ways,
And most individuals these days are highly dependent upon their society for survival... so it follows that even if you want to experience your individual power and freedom, some recognition of the beneficial reasons for certain evolved behaviorisms would be rational.

There are beneficial reasons for females to be discerning and demanding when choosing sexual partners,
and there are beneficial reasons for males to want sex enough to be drawn to developing themselves in order to gain mating rights.

I don't believe men are so much clapped on the back for sleeping with a woman, it isn't hard to do these days; it doesn't say anything about him that he was chosen.

I also don't see slut shaming going on in such a big way, no more than the "rape culture" B.S. I think that is all feminist narrative crap.

We all have a underlying sense that a woman sleeping around indiscriminately is more surprising or unexpected than a guy doing it, and that is just our biology and it's evolved behaviorisms. But people started being afraid of saying that outloud back in the seventies when the feminists started going above and beyond equality and into misandry.

Obama is stupid. Why would you want more girls being promiscuous? It is different for males and females (in a heterosexual perspective) females get penetrated, males do the penetrating. Ancient practice? Just because it is ancient, it is not right? Obama is just a puppet, is that even his own opinion? Men and women both shouldn't be promiscuous. God knows your every move and every thought. So you will be awarded your fruits appropriately.

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bluesma

I personally taught my daughter to be discerning, for the above reasons.

What did you teach your sons?

The same thing- be discerning.

But I did not refer to that because one of my sons screwed up. He relied on internet communication for his discernment process, and it failed badly. He was taken in by a much older lesbian who wanted a sperm donor.

Same thing *almost* happened to me, except it was a much younger lesbian, and thankfully I realised this sooner than later..

Crisis averted.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Taking aim at a number of gender inequalities, the president called himself a feminist.

From your source.

I guess this is what we should expect from our 21st century leaders.

(I rolled my eyes so far back, I saw my brain)

What did your brain look like?

originally posted by: Bluesma


I also don't see slut shaming going on in such a big way, no more than the "rape culture" B.S. I think that is all feminist narrative crap.

I agree with this. I'm very socially active, and have lots of friends from their early 20's on up. I can't remember the last time any guy friend "Slut shamed", so this comment by the president is way off base, on so many levels. Personally I never "kiss and tell"

To single out males today, especially for the president of the united states, in regards to this issue is despicable. I can think of many other issues needed talking about, instead of trying to divide the nation even more than it already is.

What I see is a leader of a powerful country saying "hey if the guys can do it, so can the girls", but again what this does is creates more division and tension. Like I said earlier he should have said "People".

RT chimes in the theme from the "Twilight Zone"

a reply to: shredderofsouls

I am a chap. A gentleman. A man.

I have never cheated, I have never indulged in sexual exploits with someone I did not fully intend to have a serious, committed, fully romantic relationship with, and I intend never to engage in any physical expression of romantic love with anyone, unless I fall in love with that individual first.

No kissing, no holding of hands, no physical contact of anything other than an entirely platonic nature, unless my intentions are pure. That is how I roll.

Because of the sort of men who do not see it that way, choosing instead to stick their wick in any oil they get within twenty yards of, it is becoming near impossible to meet women who are prepared to believe that men like me even exist, leave alone that they happen to be speaking to one of them. Of course, this angers me for my own reasons, but more than anything else it enrages me on behalf of the kind of female who needs and wants a gentleman, but will never recognise one because her experiences have taught her that they simply do not exist and never have.

The reason I say that, is because women should expect certain things from a man. Modern PC nonsense aside, a gentleman should treat a lady with respect, attentiveness, warmth, and as if she is the only person in the room worth even thinking of, leave alone paying any attention to. He SHOULD hold doors open, offer a jacket in the event of a lady becoming cold, he should...he just damned well should.

Unfortunately, it is just as likely these days, that a man will treat a woman poorly while in her company, cheat on her when outside of it, and talk about how stupid she is to trust him behind her back. This makes me literally shake with rage. Having ones heart played with is a horrible thing to live through. It should be any gentleman's task to bring low any cad who causes such heartache. However, because of the exploitation of females by males over successive generations, and currently, women are, somewhat justifiably mistrustful of males in my experience. That may be because of where I live, and the particular promiscuity associated with this county.

However, it is a very troubling time to be a gentleman, and that is largely down to the amount of damage that has been done to the reputation of the male, by males.

It is good to hear Obama put some support the ladies way, but would it not be better if neither men, nor women saw fit to put it about quite so much? Would it not be better if we all got a grip on the idea of delaying our gratification, just a little bit? Would it not be better if we were as are the swans? Mating for life?

I am tired of this planet sometimes.

a reply to: Realtruth

I suspect he's just trying to be politically correct and speak of the victimization of females in the Patriarchial society, to show himself a champion for women (white knighting is part of those drives to get mating rights). I don't think he is a bad guy, but I think there is a hugely powerful feminist movement going on in the US which is going berzerk with micro-aggressions, safe spaces, rape culture, the "predatorial nature" of men, and even politicians are expected to bow down to it.

originally posted by: TrueBrit

I am a chap. A gentleman. A man.

I'm pretty much the same way, but unfortunately being a gentleman is many times seen as a weakness and something to exploit.

Our society has given labels to males, Alpha and Beta.

And for the most part these roles are completely screwed up because women can financially take care of themselves, so whatever category a male falls under he is expendable.

Hence the huge decline in males wanting to get married, or take on a long term partnership.

originally posted by: KnightFire

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Taking aim at a number of gender inequalities, the president called himself a feminist.

From your source.

I guess this is what we should expect from our 21st century leaders.

(I rolled my eyes so far back, I saw my brain)

What did your brain look like?

Imagine a tiny raisin in a very big empty room.

a reply to: TrueBrit

However, because of the exploitation of females by males over successive generations, and currently, women are, somewhat justifiably mistrustful of males in my experience.

While it may not have been his intention, his comment makes it look like women should justifiably, be able to create these same feelings of mistrust in men, with women behaving in kind.

As RT stated, the comment creates divisiveness, not unity.

Both men and women should be encouraged to behave in ways that generate trust in each other. Not make them competitors or adversaries.

a reply to: Realtruth

Heh... We were always expendable in that regard.

The issue seems to be what the hell is the root of all this cavorting and mindless rutting? Where is romance in this, an age in which the first date is often had after the first sloppy encounter after a club night, a barely remembered fumble under unmade sheets, what is this age in which we live, and why does it seem to lack the emotional vibrancy that one might see as necessary to a healthy sexual existence. Furthermore, what can be done about it?

It is absolutely right and proper that a lady be afforded the same rights as a man, when it comes to perception of like behaviours. But what of the behaviours themselves? Is there any way to reclaim the romance that seems to be dead and buried, or has its day ended, and a new, colder, starker, and less nourishing thing taken its place?

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Having had my heart torn out several times, I would obviously refute the idea that women are justified in treating all males the same way, but given the risks involved with taking some males at face value, I can understand the reason why it must be the way it is.

Justifiably was probably the wrong word to use there, I will grant you. The problem however, seems insurmountable, no matter how it is phrased, and it is without doubt, a problem.

originally posted by: Bluesma
a reply to: Realtruth

I suspect he's just trying to be politically correct and speak of the victimization of females in the Patriarchial society, to show himself a champion for women (white knighting is part of those drives to get mating rights). I don't think he is a bad guy, but I think there is a hugely powerful feminist movement going on in the US which is going berzerk with micro-aggressions, safe spaces, rape culture, the "predatorial nature" of men, and even politicians are expected to bow down to it.

But that is the entire problem of his comments, instead of empowering a nation, he is creating the victim mentality by adding fuel to a fire that already way out of control.

The president of the USA should never bow down to PC agenda's that divide the people. When we start to see this then "We the people", need to wake up and really understand what is being done to us.

Whoever is writing his speeches knows exactly how the results of his words will play out.

originally posted by: TrueBrit


It is absolutely right and proper that a lady be afforded the same rights as a man, when it comes to perception of like behaviours. But what of the behaviours themselves? Is there any way to reclaim the romance that seems to be dead and buried, or has its day ended, and a new, colder, starker, and less nourishing thing taken its place?

Our new society doesn't have time for all that, everyone is way to busy working extra hours to pay for extra bling. Quick drunken states on a Friday or Saturday night will temporarily satisfy sexual urges, so the inconvenience of a relationship won't take to much time away from social media and their work schedule.

Everything is about fast, fast, fast these days and get a new model if the old one isn't working.

The materialist mentality has unfortunately spilled over into people's personal lives, and many accept it without question.

Critical thinking and Romance have basically died out, and it's all about quick fun, then back to ADD, and OCD type lifestyles.

a reply to: Realtruth

That is one of the most depressing things I have read today.

It is also probably true.

Stop the world... I want to get off.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Well in order for me to make sense of things today, I typically step back and look in from the outside, without getting to emotional, but I agree if we dwell on the situation it can be depressing.

On the positive note, my views have empowered me, because I'm able to seek out people that think and behave the way I do, it allows me to stay clear of the the crap storm, even though it's going on.

TrueBrit you have a great critical mind, don't let the things you don't have control over depress you, but rather use you keen abilities to put yourself in a position of self-empowerment.

Basically keep doing what you already do, and don't let the current MO rock your world.

Peace Brother

a reply to: Realtruth

A good philosophy.

A critical mind can be a double edged sword. Though no human being born to the world can see the future with any clarity, an analytical mind can see how various things in the present might fit together in certain ways to affect the future for good or ill. At the moment, mine does not see light, such is the darkness in fact, that I can barely make out the tunnel, but for the echo of my own babbling, shifted and distorted by the shape of the space which reflects it back at me.

I think, perhaps, I need a holiday!

Peace to you as well brother.

originally posted by: Realtruth


But that is the entire problem of his comments, instead of empowering a nation, he is creating the victim mentality by adding fuel to a fire that already way out of control.

The president of the USA should never bow down to PC agenda's that divide the people. When we start to see this then "We the people", need to wake up and really understand what is being done to us.

Whoever is writing his speeches knows exactly how the results of his words will play out.

We are in agreement on that. I think it was a bad choice. On the other hand, look how many are defending it. It might be what the majority wants to hear. In which case, I say, some might want to leave the US and go elsewhere...

originally posted by: jellyrev
It is creating emotional baggage in tons of young women. It is messing with the social values and social interactions of people. It is changing sexual selection to short term thinking.
Oxytocin which is released during private relations helps bond people together to form bond pairs. When someone frequently sleeps around they often have to actively suppress these emotions that naturally occur. Then once someone and their body gets used to suppressing ocytocin effects it creates future problems for when someone finally does settle down.

Even though I say this it does not mean I follow it.

Praising the benefits of casual sex is misleading. There are longer term neurological feedback loops that counter that, along with having to deal with but not limited to emotional suppression and buyers remorse.

And that is why God prohibits premarital sex...

I mean I don't have a problem with women who are slutty, I just wouldn't date one. That's never changing either, the person I'm with should respect themselves and their sexuality enough not to be giving it up to any random joe smo on the street. Plus, who wants a women who everyone one else has been with? Takes away the idea of it being special. Just my two cents.